Thread Tools

Again, complete fabrication. It is not testable, observable, or repeatable.

Click to expand...

You clearly did not even read (or understand) the abstract. They mention specifically that if the theory is correct there will be a measurable result in the polarization of microwave background radiation. They elaborate further in the paper the exact characteristics they predict.

I have a background in electromagnetic radiation and understand exactly what they are referring to when they talk about microwave polarization. It is not nonsensical, this is a real phenomenon.

Furthermore, we are talking about foremost researchers at Princeton, Cambridge and Univ of Pennsylvania. Are you seriously suggesting that they just made up and published nonsense and submitted it for peer review?

If the answer is yes then you are a lost cause. No amount of evidence will ever be enough for you.

I will add that testing this will require a microwave survey of the entire visible sky with equipment calibrated to look for their predicted results. That could take several years and millions of dollars. But this is what science is all about. It will be tested (if not already underway).

It could be anything other than nothing. So the problem still remains, something came from nothing...

Click to expand...

How do you know it was 'nothing'? I mean what you may think of as nothing may actually be something. For instance, empty space is actually something. So my bet is no one is claiming something came from literally nothing.

I recently finished a book that included this subject. Don't expect any of the usual suspects to even bother considering it, or have the capacity to understand it.

To be fair however, I know atheists that can't believe what science tells us about things of this nature. Once you delve into quantum mechanics and m-theory, things are so counter intuitive the mind rebels and rejects as one's existence is defined by classical experience. Some folks simply can't wrap their brains around it.

Unless, of course you are suggesting that the singularity exists completely outside time and space, and then once again, you may as well say "God".

Click to expand...

Actually, this is exactly what they are saying, the brane collision is what is postulated to have brought about spacetime as we know it.

Why prefer this over your god conjecture? Because they have actually worked out the mathematical model for how this would work and used it to make testable predictions about how the universe should appear today (again the polarization of microwave background radiation).

Have you developed a mathematical model for god that gives testable predictions? No? Then it is philosophy, not science (and not even particularly good philosophy at that).

Rather, it is simply explaining a phenomena within a prexisting Universe. Now, I don't really have a problem with this concept. I fully believe and understand the Universe is expanding. That is not a point of contention.

Click to expand...

Yet again, you make it clear that you didn't even make an attempt to read the paper (or even the abstract). This paper is hypothesizing what preceded the Big Bang and spacetime itself.

To be fair however, I know atheists that can't believe what science tells us about things of this nature. Once you delve into quantum mechanics and m-theory, things are so counter intuitive the mind rebels and rejects as one's existence is defined by classical experience. Some folks simply can't wrap their brains around it.

Click to expand...

The math on this presses my limits too. The discussion on the testable predictions I'm comfortable with though. Of course, I was in electronic intelligence in the Air Force and I've been a licensed amateur radio operator for 25 years so I'm quite familiar with how electromagnetic waves propagate and that helps.

How do you know it was 'nothing'? I mean what you may think of as nothing may actually be something. For instance, empty space is actually something. So my bet is no one is claiming something came from literally nothing.

Click to expand...

They start with the claim that you are saying that something came from nothing. Then, when you show them the something that the previous thing came from, they immediately push the horizon back with "where did that come from, nothing?" This holds true even when you manage to push the horizon back before the advent of spacetime itself (as demonstrated here). And then, when you dare ask them where god came from, suddenly he should be readily accepted as eternal without question.

I wonder if there has ever been a time where the chasm between the most knowledgeable and the most ignorant has been so vast? Here we are with the best and brightest of us pushing the envelope of knowledge past even the very start of reality as we know it while simultaneously many of us still wallow in the desperate ignorance of an archaic goat herder's religion.

I wonder if there has ever been a time where the chasm between the most knowledgeable and the most ignorant has been so vast? Here we are with the best and brightest of us pushing the envelope of knowledge past even the very start of reality as we know it while simultaneously many of us still wallow in the desperate ignorance of an archaic goat herder's religion.

Click to expand...

I've already admitted the math in the paper is beyond my understanding. Maybe I'll be able to follow along when I get closer to graduating, but what you said made me think of two things.

!) I'm not trying to blow my own horn, but I am better educated in math than the majority of the population, and I often feel like I am the ignorant one when I sit down to study. It's just the truth; almost no one studies anything beyond college algebra, and most barely make it through that in one piece.

I don't even know how far behind the curve I am from I looking at that paper. I can recognize the knowledge gap when I see your average working joe who struggles to add fractions compared to where I am trying to learn diff eq. I imagine there is an even greater leap from where I am to being able to discover the math used in the paper.

2) I'm reminded of when Sir Bedevere was forced to teach the villagers how to determine if the witch weighed the same as a duck.

They start with the claim that you are saying that something came from nothing. Then, when you show them the something that the previous thing came from, they immediately push the horizon back with "where did that come from, nothing?" This holds true even when you manage to push the horizon back before the advent of spacetime itself (as demonstrated here). And then, when you dare ask them where god came from, suddenly he should be readily accepted as eternal without question.

It is intellectual dishonesty in its purest form.

Click to expand...

Yes and it's really weird to see it play out here. I mean you wonder how people can remain so ignorant sometimes and I'm starting to think it's done by great dedication.

I wonder if there has ever been a time where the chasm between the most knowledgeable and the most ignorant has been so vast? Here we are with the best and brightest of us pushing the envelope of knowledge past even the very start of reality as we know it while simultaneously many of us still wallow in the desperate ignorance of an archaic goat herder's religion.

Click to expand...

And I think most people don't realize just how much more intelligent or well educated the people pushing the envelope are. The math involved in theoretical physics isn't something where someone could sit down with the average college educated person and explain the math. It takes years of learning higher level math and physics just to have the knowledge and skill base to begin to understand it let alone make advances.

We also live in an era where this high level math is new to us as a species. I wonder what we would be like biologically if we had calculus a million years ago. We're not really built to think like that. There are still tribes in the Amazon where the people have no concept of numbers.

Well, the whole universe was in a hot, dense state, then nearly 14 billion years ago expansion started

wait

The Earth began to cool,
The autotrophs began to drool,
Neanderthals developed tools,
We built a wall (we built the pyramids!),
Math, science, history, unraveling the mysteries,
That all started with the big bang!

So, do you have a mathematical model for any of these other options that gives us testable predictions?

Click to expand...

No I don't.

I tend to go along the lines of what Harper posted: that there was not necessarily "nothing." My point is that once that door is open, you can specify what ever you want as having "been there all along." Whether it was God, whimsical space pixies or a wind-up universe factory with foundations made from jube-jubes.
That leads to the question of how the "thing" appeared, because in my limited human comprehension these "things" must come from somewhere or have a start point. If that isn't the case then the only thing that makes sense to me is that time is circular. In other words the past is in the past and also the future.
It may well be that we or some other aliens create the mischievous pixies who blow the whole lot up in some millenia to come, and so again it starts...

My point is that once that door is open, you can specify what ever you want as having "been there all along." Whether it was God, whimsical space pixies or a wind-up universe factory with foundations made from jube-jubes.

Click to expand...

That's just it, that is no longer a valid statement. The whole point of this thread is that there are now scientific theories that push past the very start of spacetime itself.

It was one thing when science couldn't even begin to describe what came before. Anyone's guess was equally valid, but that is no longer the case. Now we have well developed, sound and testable mathematical theories that fully explain the cause of the Big Bang and the beginning of spacetime.

God, whimsical universe factories and magic pixies are no longer equally valid options. They can't even be considered valid at all because the math does not reflect their existence. Theists can keep repeating this all they want, but it's just willful ignorance.

Yes, science has a theory as to what caused the Big Bang and the theory makes predictions that should be observable and testable still today. So, I don't want to hear theists claim that "scientists have no idea what came before the Big Bang" anymore. If you want to challenge the validity of the theory, here it is complete with all the supporting math. Break out your slide rule and microwave detector and have at it.

Glock Talk is the #1 site to discuss the world’s most popular pistol, chat about firearms, accessories and more. As our membership continues to grow we look forward to reading your stories and learning from your experiences. Membership is free and we welcome all types of shooters, whether you're a novice or a pro. Come for the info, stay and make some friends..